Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2025-31 - VAR 2025-08 - PA 2021-19RESOLUTION NO. 2025-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE NO. 2025-08 TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FT. TO 6 FT. DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURING FACILITY LOCATED AT APN: 371-150-017 Whereas, Guy Selleck, G.E.M. Investments, LLC has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-19 (General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, Zone Change No. 2022-02, Conditional Use Permit No. 2022-17, Commercial Design Review No. 2022-12, and Variance No. 2025-08) to develop the 6.77-acre vacant site in two (2) phases with two (2) new two-story commercial manufacturing warehouse buildings totaling 92,760 square feet. Each building is proposed to be approximately 46,000 square feet and would include mezzanines, offices, and loading docks. The project is located on Grand Avenue and Kathryn Way and includes Assessor Parcel Number 371-150-017; Whereas, Variance (VAR) No. 2025-08 to reduce the required front yard setback from 15 ft. to 6 ft. due to site constraints; Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.080 (Variances), Section 17.410.070 (Approving Authority), and Section 17.410.030 (Multiple Applications) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to variance applications; and Whereas, on September 16, 2025, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Commission has considered the Project prior to making a recommendation to the Council and has found it acceptable. Section 2: The Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the California Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 59000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore General Plan (GP), and the LEMC and finds and determines that the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of California Planning and Zoning Law and with the goals and policies of the GP and the LEMC. Section 3: On October 21, 2025, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such ot her matters as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the Project, the Commission adopted a resolution finding and determining that the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 2025- 02) (SCH No. 2025090173) is adequate and is prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. Section 4: That in accordance with Section 17.415.080.F of the LEMC, the Commission makes the following findings regarding Variance No. 2025-08: Docusign Envelope ID: 8C7A38DA-22E8-4833-B849-942CC513C8F6 PC Reso. No. 2025-31 Page 2 of 3 1. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to LEMC, Section 17.172.050 have been incorporated into the approval of the variance to ensure development of the property in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning distric t in which the site is located. Appropriate and applicable conditions of approval have been included to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Further, compliance with the conditions of approval will be reviewed during the plan check and inspection review process prior to commencing construction and operations. 2. There are special circumstances, pursuant to the purpose of Chapter 17.415.080 of the LEMC, applicable to the subject property which do not apply generally to other properties in the neighborhood, and, therefore, granting of the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is located. The applicant is requesting a variance due to the physical hardship based on the narrow width of the lot and unique topographical and environmental constraints affecting the property that would preclude them from having the same rights as the surrounding properties. There is an active fault line and a sewer trunk line located at the rear of the property that bisects the property. There are also known environmentally sensitive areas located at the rear of the property. Even though the subject property is rectangular in shape, its narrow width creates physical challenges with developing the lot that meets all the required standards. All these factors limit the buildable area of the lot that is physically suitable for construction. Granting the variance would not constitute a special privilege because there are certain unique physical circumstances on the existing property that would preclude the applicant from having the same development rights as the surrounding properties. 3. In approving the variance, any reductions authorized from the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance represents the minimum deviation from this code necessary to fulfill the purpose of this chapter and enable reasonable development of the property. The proposed variance would reduce the front yard setback in order to allow the applicant to reasonably develop their project consistent with the other lots located adjacent to the project area. The proposed variance represents the minimum deviation necessary to enable reasonable development of the property in a manner consistent with the surrounding area. 4. Granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone district in which the property is situated. Granting the variance would not constitute a special privilege because there are certain unique physical circumstances on the existing property unlike the other properties within the vicinity with the same zone that do not have the same physical hardships and could develop their property consistently with the C-M zoning district’s development standards and requirements contained in the LEMC. Because of the physical hardships, it would preclude the applicant from having the same development rights as the surrounding properties. Docusign Envelope ID: 8C7A38DA-22E8-4833-B849-942CC513C8F6 PC Reso. No. 2025-31 Page 3 of 3 Section 5: Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the Conditions of Approval imposed upon the project, the Commission hereby approves Variance No. 2025-08. Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Passed and Adopted on this 21st day of October, 2025. John Gray Chair Attest: _____________________________ Damaris Abraham Community Development Director STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Damaris Abraham, Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2025-31 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held October 21, 2025 and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Devor, Pease and Peters; and Chair Gray NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Vice Chair Carroll Damaris Abraham Community Development Director Docusign Envelope ID: 8C7A38DA-22E8-4833-B849-942CC513C8F6